Re: abuse of Priority; was [Re: Needs sponsor for qtcups]

On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 12:16:25PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I am patient and I am not worry. > But I think you should first send me above your message privately only > before blaming me in such public way. So that everybody else who is annoyed by the priority also send you a private ma

Re: abuse of Priority; was [Re: Needs sponsor for qtcups]

On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 12:16:25PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I am patient and I am not worry. > But I think you should first send me above your message privately only > before blaming me in such public way. So that everybody else who is annoyed by the priority also send you a private m

abuse of Priority; was [Re: Needs sponsor for qtcups]

Hi Mariusz, I see that you are using "Priority: urgent", "Importance: High" headers all the time, and repeating your sponsor requests 2-3 times within a short time-period. I think it is a good netiquette not to abuse the priority fields, and searching through the debian-devel list I found that yo

abuse of Priority; was [Re: Needs sponsor for qtcups]

Hi Mariusz, I see that you are using "Priority: urgent", "Importance: High" headers all the time, and repeating your sponsor requests 2-3 times within a short time-period. I think it is a good netiquette not to abuse the priority fields, and searching through the debian-devel list I found that y